Post by Spains HardenPost by Tony CooperOn Wed, 4 Dec 2019 10:21:08 -0800 (PST), Spains Harden
Post by Spains HardenPost by Tony CooperOn Wed, 4 Dec 2019 08:31:26 -0700, Jerry Friedman
Post by Jerry FriedmanPost by Tony CooperPost by tonbeiI have a question about the following sentences from a novel.
"I don't work at the CFC. Or for it. Just an invited guest on occasion."
(note: CFC stands for the Cambridge Forensic Center. )
(Port Mortuary by P. Cornwell)
question: about a difference between "work at" and "work for",
since it seems that they are almost of the same meaning.
I couldn't grasp their differences in meaning, if there are.
If there's a difference,
"work at CFC" means "work at a workplace of CFC", and "work for CFC" does "he's a CFC's employee."
Yes, but it should be "a CFC employee".
Post by Tony CooperMany buildings house more than one tenant. The building may have the
name of a particular organization, and the space in the building may
be occupied by the organization, but other space is leased to other
tenants.
A person here in Orlando could have an office in the Bank of America
building but not work for Bank of America.
Also a contractor--from a janitor to a consultant--may work at some
organization's workplace but not be employed by that organization.
Post by Tony CooperIn the situation Cornwell describes, the person neither works for the
CFC or has an office in the CFC building.
(you mean "nor", not "or".)
Yes, of course. In a different thread I commented that things done in
one newsgroup are viewed differently in another newsgroup, or not even
noticed. My error would not have been noticed in the photography
newsgroup I follow. Everyone reading my post in this newsgroup
probably noticed it, and you were just the first to point it out.
I think the word "nor" is no longer part of everyday BrE.
"...the person neither works for the CFC or has an office in the CFC
building."
...is good English isn't it?
"Good English" has a horses-for-courses aspect. My use of "or"
instead of "nor" was in alt.usage.english, and that's not good English
in this group. It can be good enough if I tell my cable repair person
"Neither internet or TV is working". It tells him what he needs to
know.
That does not mean that I would deliberately choose "or" when speaking
to him. It means only that either is acceptable without note.
So it is good English. athel will perhaps take note that these
are "logic gates" - requiring logic.
The "logic gate" usage is a technical usage, not ordinary English usage.
Lots of technical words have meanings that differ, sometimes to some
considerable extent, from their ordinary meanings.
Take, for example, these technical terms from my own field:
float: not a carnival vehicle or a fishing aid, but an attempt to
provide some degree of precision for storing real numbers.
double: not a döppelganger or an extra helping of whisky, but a float
that is intended to provide extra precision.
main: not the beautiful briny, but an entry point into a program.
long: not "yearn", but a wider-than-usual integer data type.
auto: not a car, but a data type qualifier indicating that its storage
should be temporary.
And there are lots more examples where they came from, too.
Post by Spains HardenIf the word "nor" is falling into
desuetude then we need to find other ways of communicating with each
other.
If the word "the" is falling... but it isn't. Neither is "nor".
Post by Spains HardenNeither A or B
Neither A nor B
Which did you intend?
The first is acceptable to most people. In my view, the second is
preferable (and better English).
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within